Churchill's advocacy of chemical strike against German cities

During World War II, Winston Churchill issued a memorandum advocating a chemical strike on German cities using poison gas and possibly anthrax. Although the idea was rejected, it has provoked debate.^[1] In July 1944, fearing that rocket attacks on London would get even worse and hoping to "shorten the war by a year",^[2] Churchill wrote a secret memorandum asking his military chiefs to "think very seriously over this question of using poison gas." He said "it is absurd to consider morality on this topic" and that:

I should be prepared to do anything [Churchill's emphasis] that would hit the enemy in a murderous place. I may certainly have to ask you to support me in using poison gas. We could drench the cities of the Ruhr and many other cities in Germany ..., and if we do it, let us do it one hundred per cent.

—Winston Churchill, 'Most Secret' PRIME MINISTER'S PERSONAL MINUTE to the Chiefs of Staff, 6 July 1944^[2]

The Joint Planning Staff (JPS), however, advised against the use of gas because it would inevitably provoke Germany to retaliate with gas. They argued that this would be to the Allies' disadvantage in France both for military reasons and because it might "seriously impair our relations with the civilian population when it became generally known that chemical warfare was first employed by us." The JPS had similar concerns about public morale in Britain, fearing that people might become resentful if they felt a gas war could have been avoided. The Chiefs of Staff also warned that the Nazis would have no particular "difficulty in holding down the cowed German population, if they were subjected to gas attack," whereas the British population "are in no such inarticulate condition."^[3]

Churchill responded to this advice by saying:

I am not at all convinced by this negative report. But clearly I cannot make head against the parsons and the warriors at the same time. [...] The matter should be kept under review and brought up again when things get worse.

At the same time, the JPS examined the case of using anthrax bioweapons against six large German cities but ruled this out on the grounds that the anthrax bombs were not yet available.^[4] A large batch of aerial bombs were ordered, but by the time the US factory was ready to produce them, they were deemed unnecessary since the war in Europe was almost over.^[5][6]

Robert Harris argues that as soon as another weapon of mass destruction—the atomic bomb—became available, and offered a chance to shorten the war, the Americans used it. "Why, from an ethical or political point of view, should germ warfare have been regarded any differently? [by British]."^[7]

Notes

1. ^ BBC2 Newsnight, 1/5/81; The Guardian, 7,9,13,20,30/5, 2/6/81; The Times, 11/5/81, 20/5/81, 15/6/81; The Listener, 25/6, 2/7, 17/8/81; Daily Telegraph, 18,21,25,29/5, 2,11/6/81; Encounter magazine, Vol.58-9 no.2; New Society, Vol.60; Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol.4 no.4 and 'Churchill's Anthrax Bombs - a debate', Vol.4 no.12, November 1987.
2. ^ ^{a b} Paxman, Jeremy; Harris, Robert (2002-08-06) [1982]. "The War That Never Was". A higher form of killing: the secret history of chemical and biological warfare. p. 128. ISBN 9780812966534. OCLC 268949025. http://libcom.org/library/churchills-plans-drench-germany-poison-gas-anthrax-robert-harris-jeremy-paxman. "I want the matter studied in cold blood by sensible people" 
3. ^ Paxman and Harris", p132-35.
4. ^ Paxman and Harris, p131-5, 100-6.
5. ^ Churchill's Anthrax Bombs - a debate R.V. Jones and J.M. Lewis, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol.4 no.4 p42-3.
6. ^ Paxman and Harris, p101-3.
7. ^ Paxman and Harris, p136-7, 103-15.

See also

• Operation Vegetarian